Take our user survey and make your voice heard.

As A-bomb survivors age, Japanese pass storytelling to young


The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

Login to comment

This is a good thing.

I'm sorry but I feel America had to do it. If we had a chance to go back in time and change things I wouldn't change a thing. In fact, I think Japan is better for it today. It's unfortunate that Abe is leading back down this road with his military build up. Lets hope that China or North Korea isn't the next country to nuke Japan.

If we don't stop Abe we are most certainly setting ourselves up to repeat the mistakes of the past.

7 ( +14 / -7 )

I hope it will spread peace and harmony, we need a peaceful world, without wars, without destruction and without destructive weapons.

7 ( +7 / -1 )

He should upload his speech to YouTube. That way, it will be preserved forever.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Yes. These should be done on video to reach a wider audience

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Truman made the best decision he could with the information he had at the time. It is absurd to view the decision making of the past with the knowledge of the present. It was a different time and we were at war, and a war we didn't want or start. 450,000 Americans were already dead and a quick end was mandatory. The Japanese were convinced to surrender as long as they could keep their war criminal emperor. Stop with the revisionist history.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

There was no need to invade or nuke women and children. This should be obvious to all but the most bloodthirsty of terrorists.

As Brig. Gen. Carter W. Clarke, the officer in charge of preparing MAGIC intercepted cable summaries in 1945, stated:

"….we brought them [the Japanese] down to an abject surrender through the accelerated sinking of their merchant marine and hunger alone, and when we didn't need to do it, and we knew we didn't need to do it, and they knew that we knew we didn't need to do it, we used them as an experiment for two atomic bombs."

Prior to nuking Hiroshima, the U.S. military had already obliterated over 60 Japanese cities with napalm and white phosphorous. This conclusively proves that Hiroshima and Nagasaki had little value other than as an opportunity for the US military to conduct nuke testing on human subjects.

In this connection, Paul Tibbets is on record as stating that Hiroshima was set aside as a "virgin" test city. Additionally, the primary targets at Hiroshima were residential in nature with the overwhelming majority of casualties being civilian. In fact, Hosokawa Elementary school was mere meters from the epicenter of the Hiroshima nuke strike.

The fire-bombings and nuclear attacks on Japan were war crimes on par with the holocaust suffered by the Jews

-3 ( +5 / -7 )

"Japan learned from the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that the tragedy wrought by nuclear weapons must never be repeated and that humanity and nuclear weapons cannot coexist." - Daisaku Ikeda

"Every dollar spent on nuclear is one less dollar spent on clean renewable energy and one more dollar spent on making the world a comparatively dirtier and a more dangerous place, because nuclear power and nuclear weapons go hand in hand." - Mark Z. Jacobson

Our history, even in the reflection of seventy years of danger and suffering, has taught mankind nothing, prompted no wisdom and still threatens to destroy all he world.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

I'm also firmly against attacking non-military targets even if they can be argued to be "collateral damage" due to their proximity to a legitimate military target.

I see a lot of people, presumably Americans, who say it the nukes were justified due to reasons A, B, C, etc (ie. saving lives by ending the war early). Going by that logic, any nation at war with another has a legitimate cause to nuke their enemies don't they?

Doesn't sound convincing at all. I think that people who try and argue for the legitimacy of the nukes do so because instinctively they know they wouldn't stand for it if they were the party who was nuked.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Japan is the only major Asian country that doesn't have nuclear weapons.

A nuclear armed Japan would improve balance of power in the region and decrease the possibility of accidental nuclear conflicts.

It would also give China a face-saving excuse to tone down their aggression in the east and south Cina seas.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

This past needs to be remembered in order to prevent a repeat in the future. Look at the pictures and hear the stories as this can be repeated in any city in the world.

3 ( +4 / -2 )

YuriOtani: "This past needs to be remembered in order to prevent a repeat in the future."

ALL of the past needs to be remembered, and especially that of war and other tragedies so that it not be repeated. And yet some, yourself included from time to time, think there are a couple of nations who should forget history when it comes to what Japan did and move on, but that the world needs to remember what happened TO Japan.

What these survivors are doing is teaching, in many senses of the word, and that is a fantastic thing. Same as a former sex-slave passing down her experiences of tragedies that happened to her, and other victims of horrors doing the same, when and if they can. NEVER should these people and their stories be pushed aside, white-washed, or forgotten, and I only hope the kids and young adults of the world actually listen.

3 ( +7 / -4 )

I am ok with this, but where is the story of those being recruited to tell about sex slavery, Nanjing, Batan Death March, etc etc .............Oh silly me what was I thinking

Japan you need some REAL context, balance in all this, stop cherry picking the victim stuff only

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Article states: "The Aug. 6, 1945, atomic bombing in Hiroshima killed about 140,000 people from injuries and immediate effects of radiation within five months",

Where is the evidence that 140,000 people were killed? The American researchers did an extensive random sampling of the surviving population, asking how large their family was and how many had been killed. From the results it was calculated that 25% of the civilian population had been killed. The great unknown, of course, is how large the population was at the time of the explosion. But even if high estimate of 350-400,000 people were present in Hiroshima on August 6, the death toll ought not to exceed 90,000, if the American methodology was sound. The Hiroshima police estimated the dead and the missing total of about 90,000, if all the missing are presumed dead.

-3 ( +3 / -5 )

as one world stateman said - 'war is an expression of human folly. war itself is not glorious, and we should never trumpet it as such'.

the glorification of war is not something of value to younger populations. it can only induce the fallibility of human beings.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I have a hard time believing that this generation will take much interest in anything that didn't happen five minutes ago on twitter. They can be made to do many things in an obligatory way. But that will not lead to deep feelings about the issue.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Katsura was 14 when he and his schoolmates, put to work for the war effort, were delivering a cartful of weapons parts from school to a factory...

Attacking civilians is never justifiable.

Civilians producing weapons to kill other civilians is never justifiable.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

@Megumi Shakti "I am sorry but I feel America had to do it".

This is nothing but Inferiority Complex. There is nothing in the Universe that would justify brutal bombings of civilian population by Weapon of Mass Destruction.

"In fact I think Japan is better for it today".

In fact, as result Japan lost its large part of sovereignity, becoming a colony of the USA. Many Japanese politicians are lap dogs of the USA. Americans bases are deployed in Japan and American servicemen often abuse locals, showing clear disrespect to Japanese culture and custom. Since a very childhood, young Japanese are taught "to love the USA because of existence of Mickey Mouse, Coca-Cola, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie".

@Burning Bush "The bombs should've been dropped in an unpopulated area". I have to say that I am well aware of certain historical events. Americans always insist that "dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were hard but inevitable decisions to save lives of American soldiers". But after the WWII they also developed another set of plans, called Dropshot and Totality. In short, they were ready to bomb by atomic bombs all major cities and industrial centers of the USSR. Whos lives they were going "to save" by mentioned plans of massive nuclear attack? Nuclear bombings of civilians were and still are clear acts of utter cowardice and ultimate brutality.

@Crazy Joe "It is absurd to view the decision making of the past with the knowledge of the present. It was a different time.."

Cowardice and brutality were cowardice and brutality 70 years ago and still are cowardice and brutality now. I wrote above that your leadership also had developed plans of nuclear attack of the Soviet Union. But Americans did not accomplish it. Guess, why ? Because Soviets weren't a bunch of innocent civilians. They quickly developed their a-bombs and intercontinental ballistic missiles. So, the retaliatory strike would be horrible for the USA. Fighting a strong nation is not the same as bombings of elderly, women and children by weapon of mass destruction.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

yamashi AUG. 03, 2015 - 11:48AM JST There is nothing in the Universe that would justify brutal bombings of civilian population by Weapon of Mass Destruction.

You can say that about brutal massacre of civilian population of Nanking. If the atomic bombs hadn't been dropped, no one would have been aware of quite how devastating such weapons could be. I am sure actual usage contributed to cold war deterance. A cold war nuclear conflict might well have arisen if the bomb hadn't been deployed in Japan.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Narration of past events attributed to government-organized programs feel distinctly hollow. Classrooms neglect to reveal the full nature to the horrors Imperial Japanese Army and Navy, 1937-1945 committed. Colonialism, extreme nationalism, the propaganda that emphasized above all that duty to the state is only the true path to enlightenment. There is an element to the psychology of institutionalized dehumanisation, that challenges self-perception, and comes some way to explaining the act of kamikaze.

'Having witnessed what the man-made nuclear weapon did to humans, I must condemn it as absolutely wrong, and the mistake should never be repeated, that’s what drives me to tell my story, and I’ll continue to do so as long as I live'.........Remarkable, a story that doesn't remotely grasp the political or ideological agenda attributed to the continuing refusal of governments of Japan to fully disclose to Japanese classrooms the full extent of 'Japans' war.

2 ( +5 / -2 )

@sfjp330 "...brutal massacre of civilian population in Nanking".

Flawed logic. There were soldiers on IJA in Nanking. Civilians of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had nothing to do with "Nanking massacre".

"..no one would have been aware of quite of how devastating such weapons could be".

In short, you think that such an inhumane "experiment" on civilians was OK, right?

-5 ( +3 / -9 )

“Having witnessed what the man-made nuclear weapon did to humans, I must condemn it as absolutely wrong, and the mistake should never be repeated,” he said. “That’s what drives me to tell my story, and I’ll continue to do so as long as I live. Sir, Invading other country like Philippines without warning and to rape and kill their peaceful people is more wrong. Japan is guilty on that regard in fact Japan paid Philippine undisclosed amount of money as "reparation goods" to compensate the damage Japan has done to the Philippines as also an admission to their guilt. The USA dropped the first bomb as warning for bigger one, but Japan didn't heeded the warning and continue their killing of innocent lives of all the countries they invaded, so US did it another one and a third one was on hold, luckily Japan surrendered but the devastation was already great, too late.

-2 ( +0 / -3 )

The annual guilt-fest begins, I see. Here are the options as to how to end the War:

Option 1: blockade. Millions of Japanese starve slowly to death before the inevitable surrender.

Option 2; invasion. Millions of Japanese die in human wave attacks on the Allied invaders before the inevitable surrender. Additionally, hundreds of thousands of Allied soldiers die.

Option 3: continued firebombing. Millions of Japanese burn to death as even more cities are torched before the inevitable surrender.

Option 4: "test bombings" in unpopulated areas. No guarantee that the people in power will see the demonstrations, or believe any reports from those who do. Plus, the US had only enough nuclear material for two bombs. The next weapons wouldn't be available for months. This would have been a huge gamble, and politically impossible to sell the Allied civilian populations.

By comparison, the atomic bombings are almost, dare I say, humane?

-3 ( +2 / -4 )

yamashi AUG. 03, 2015 - 12:20PM JSTFlawed logic. There were soldiers on IJA in Nanking. Civilians of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had nothing to do with "Nanking massacre".

Lets not pretend that Japan was acting as liberators of the east. They were slaughtering on a scale that only Stalin was able to match. Japan was able to prevent both atomic bombs by act of unconditional surrender, where as Nanking did in fact surrender and were still attacked. Although both resulted in significant loss of life the Americans were facing a long drawn out battle with little chance of a Japanese capitulation where as Manchuria had already collapsed and Nanking was a mop up. Previous invasions had shown that even without resources the Japanese army would fight to the last man without surrender. Fire bombing and attacking Japan itself was not resulting in much.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

You forgot one.

Accept the Japanese surrender, which the Japanese government started pursuing in April, 1945.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Latest NHK poll says 49% of Japanese polled said that what the US did in dropping the bombs, was unforgivable.

I just have to shake my head.

-4 ( +1 / -6 )

Accept the Japanese surrender, which the Japanese government started pursuing in April, 1945.

The pressure was on the Japanese to accept the surrender terms offered by the United Nations, not the other way around.

BTW, the Japanese never had any serious surrender offers until the last days of the war. Even after the first bomb, the war council wasted hours arguing which terms to communicate to the allies (keeping Taiwan, Korea, no occupation of Japan, plus all kinds of other unacceptable actions). It took the decisive intervention of the Emperor himself to tip the consensus towards unconditional surrender.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

yamashi: "Flawed logic. There were soldiers on IJA in Nanking. Civilians of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had nothing to do with "Nanking massacre"

I agree 100% that the atomic bombings were unnecessary, and heinous war crimes that never should have been committed and only WERE committed to satisfy investors in the Manhattan project, to test a weapon, and to scare the Soviets. It is absolutely disgusting, and NO ONE can rightly say it was justified. But that said, you need to admit that the atrocities in Nanjing and elsewhere were JUST as heinous and inhumane, if not moreso, and stop saying they are not related because you yourself talk about atrocity and inhumanity with regard to war and the atomic bombings. You cannot say it was okay for Japan to do what it did, or worse yet deny it, and the world should 'move on and forget it', but that what happened to Japan was wrong and we should never forget it. It spits in the eye of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, and the reputation of Japan as a whole when you subjectively choose what to remember and what to forget.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Sorry, Darnname. "Started pursuing" is a weasel phrase that means nothing. Japan was getting its collective butt whipped. If they wanted to surrender, the onus was on them to shout it LOUD. As late as July 1945 President Truman warned Japan of "prompt and utter destruction" if they didn't surrender immediately. Instead, the Declaration was met with a combination of silence and defiance. If there is any blame to be levied, it is on the Imperial War Cabinet, which refused to recognize reality.

2 ( +4 / -1 )

@Papi2013"...what the US did in dropping the bombs, was unforgivable".


-1 ( +3 / -3 )

At the time, America was slaughtering on a massive scale and looking to expand its global empire as illustrated by the Philippine Genocide. Much of the slaughter in the Philippines took place after surrender. In this connection, I recommend researching the role of General Jacob Smith and his "kill everyone" policy for Filipinos.

The slaughter continued in Korea, Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam etc. America exploited its conquest of Okinawa as a staging ground.

Even though Japan had already expressed willingness to negotiate surrender, H&N were nuked by Truman without explicit warning that he would use nuclear weapons on primarily civilian targets.

As the Japanese had already expressed clear interest in capitulation, the nuking of H&N was a hideous war crime. As Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz stated in 1945:

"The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace before the atomic age was announced to the world with the destruction of Hiroshima"

-Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz

-2 ( +4 / -5 )

asdfgtr: You obviously buy the white-washed history texts. Yeah, it was the US who engaged in slaughter across Asia -- not Japan! They are the victims! heck, all Japan wanted was to defend Asia and teach everyone there modern education and modern bath methods, right? There was no Nanking, no sex slaves, no Baatan death march, they didn't execute POWs when they were losing the war, there was no unit 751, no sword-race competitions to see who could behead 100 civilians first, no forced suicides of their own nationals.... none of that happened!

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

ASDF, again the weasel words; "expressed willingness to surrender". Means nothing. It would have been simple for Japan to surrender. Send a representative to either the Swiss or Swedish embassies in Tokyo. Tell the Swiss or Swedish that Japan accepted the Potsdam Declaration and agreed to all its terms. The Swiss or Swedish contact their representatives in Washington. Bingo. War over, no atomic horror. Instead, they wasted time and wasted time and prevaricated and brought death upon themselves.

-2 ( +0 / -3 )

A nuclear armed Japan would improve balance of power in the region and decrease the possibility of accidental nuclear conflicts.

But can you imagine what a nuclear armed Japan would have done in the 1940's? Japan investigated making their own at the time, but thankfully failed.

It's good for this guy to teach youngsters about this event, I hope they are also being taught the whole situation in Asia at that time.

-2 ( +0 / -3 )

Vast Right-Wing: "War over, no atomic horror. Instead, they wasted time and wasted time and prevaricated and brought death upon themselves."

Agree, except that they brought on the atomic bombings themselves. It's not that simple. They helped in the continuation of the war, but did not in any way deserve the atomic bombings, and the lack of an outright surrender is not the only reason the bombings were carried out. There was demand that the price tag of the Manhattan project -- more than a billion, which back then was huge! -- show results. There were the Communists in Russia to scare. And it was the 'ultimate experiment'. A continued conventional attack would not necessarily have resulted in even a SINGLE American loss, as those who claim the bombings saved thousands of American lives claim. The bombings were not warranted. period.

1 ( +3 / -3 )

Smith, by what evidence do you back up your claim that a continued conventional attack would have not possibly caused a single American loss? Each day the war continued, ALlied POWs were dying in the tender care of the Imperial Japanese Army. Each day the war continued, men became sick and died from myriad tropical diseases throughout the Pacific war theater, because Japan continued to fight.

Japan didn't "help" the continuation of the war- they chose it. And paid a terrible price.

Do you really imagine that, if Japan had accepted the terms of the Potsdam Declaration in July of 1945, the US would STILL have dropped atomic weapons in August? That is a ridiculous assertion, if you are suggesting it.

1 ( +2 / -2 )

smithinjapan: You must be exhausted from battling that straw man. Two wrongs don`t make a right. In this connection, I highly recommend reading about General Joseph Smith and his kill all policy for Filipinos. The US engaged in genocide in the Philippines, institutionalized mass rape, internment of its citizens, execution of surrendering POWs, live human experimentation on children during the Guatemala Syphilis Experiment, experimentation on children using chemicals, nuking 3,000 of its own citizens at Hiroshima and countless other atrocities white-washed from US history books.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

A very informative and well-done documentary that just aired on TV. I highly recommend it.


2 ( +2 / -0 )

VastR-WC, again the weasel words "they brought death upon themselves". Typical of the criminal to blame the victim. There is no excuse for mass murdering innocent women and children with nuclear weapons.

Additionally, no US Pacific top level commander supported either nuking civilians or an invasion. They collectively felt Japan was defeated and ready to surrender. Here is an excellent starting point for their feelings. 


1 ( +3 / -2 )

The American knew the Japanese going to surrender they deliberately went ahead and bombed, the United State's Secretary of State resigned he couldn't agreed with the US President of the bombing of H-bomb on Japan. It was part of Race discrimination.they could bomb Germany too why didn't they?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

IMHO, The United States of America and the President should be blamed for the catastrophic effect of the A Bomb dropped in Hiroshima and Nagazaki. As some info I have read in cyberspace, USA dropped tha ABomb just to test that Atomic bomb that killed hundred thousands of civilians. Even the US president then wasn't even sure what to do about it. It is sad though but that's how it was.

2 ( +3 / -0 )

ASDF, what is the evidence that Japan was going to surrender?

To the contrary, the war faction of the Japanese cabinet was committed to the idea of fighting to the death, or at least bleeding the Allies so much that they could negotiate a surrender. You should look up the plans for "Operation Ketsu-Go", which was the Japanese plan to defend Honshu and Kyushu from an amphibious invasion. They had carefully husbanded resources and materiel, and were prepared to sacrifice 15 MILLION civilians in the slaughter. Consider that the Battle of Okinawa alone saw 70,000 Allied casualties, and over 200,000 Japanese dead. Multiply that by a factor of 50 for an invasion of the Japanese Home Islands and you can see what might have been. A bloodbath.

Again, it would have been easy for Japan to surrender. There were open diplomatic channels through neutral countries that the Japanese government chose not to use.

-1 ( +0 / -2 )

Japan's atomic bomb survivors continue in fight against nuclear weapons....


1 ( +2 / -1 )

The Japanese started to surrender in April through the Swiss.

@Vast Right Wingnut Conspiracy: you're wrong. Period. Read Truman's diary.

The Japanese terms of surrender in April, 1945 were exactly how the final situation existed after the war.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Passing down from generation to generation that how dreadful a war can be is really important, but I sometimes wonder how well we, who have never experienced a war, actually can understand the catastrophic consequences of wars.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Again, the Japanese were attempting to NEGOTIATE through the Swiss. The Allies had agreed that there would be no negotiation. As usual, the Japanese cabinet was trying to dance around the turd without stepping in it. Nobody wanted to be the first one to actually say, "we give up". So instead, they were putting out feelers here and there, trying to read the wind, trying to possible secure some advantageous terms. None of which were possible. All it would have taken, even in April, would have been a simple "we surrender" message. particularly after Germany surrendered unconditionally in May of 1945, the Allies would have never been able to accept a negotiated settlement.

In short, the ball was 100% in Japan's court at that time. They were beaten, and knew it, but just couldn't bring themselves to actually say it. Maybe it was foolish pride, or Yamato spirit, but whatever the reason they couldn't make the right decision. And subsequently paid a terrible price.

-1 ( +1 / -3 )

Japan plays the poor us,and what a crime it was to drop these terrible bombs.yet , they will accept the the protection and security afforded to them by the U.S. Nuclear umbrella. While these two bombs were terrible, they probably saved way more lives. More people died in one night in the Tokyo air raids than in Hiroshima, more people died at the hands of the Japanese army. The Japanese while trying to promote the Japanese Schindler fail to reach their children about nangkin, the slave labour, the cruelty handed out to POWS, not to mention the comfort women.we could go on and on, the human medical experiments and treatment of allied POWs,would have put the their allies to shame. While these bombs may have been terrible,they stopped the Russians taking over other parts of Japan,similar to Europe, prevented more Tokyo type air raids, kamikaze attacks,and may have saved more Japanese men,women and children ,than the emperor or the military government ever did.But maybe the biggest lesson the world received was a valuable lesson on what these bombs could do. And while every Japanese child is taken to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I wonder how many of these same children are taken to trips abroad to learn about the death marches,nangkin,and other atrocities. My guess is Zero. And I wonder if Japan had developed the bomb first, and could end the killing,death, and war in one week rather than months, if they wouldn't have dropped the bomb?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Again, the narrative of Japan as the victim, not the victimizer, continues.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

This is not a history lesson but a warning for today. There are people today thinking about using atomic weapons TODAY on civilian targets. Just picture an atomic weapon being set of in one of today's cities. While arguing about the past is fine we need to protect the civilians of today.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

If Japan could have been using nuclear weapons during WW2 over other countries, their narrative will be different. Part of the reasons that Japanese people, I mean some people has deep fear and resentment over nuclear weapons. Why did those horrible stories has got to be keep talking until now and every year in August twice the ceremony praying for a no nuclear weapons world. Because they understood there is at least one nation on earth which possesses the nuclear destruction capability and have deep vengeance mania over Japan is still making nuclear weapons and refused to listen to anyone or reconciliation with Japan.

You can guess which nuclear country I am talking about..

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@ elephant there are certainly much more than one country with nuclear weapons, how about you study a bit more about the history of WW2 other that the A bombs, the population of Japan in 1945 was about 60 million, more than this number of people died in Europe and Asia, 2/3 of these civilians. Many of these civilian deaths were from Hitlers Nazis and the IJA in the name of the emperor. the death and destruction in Japan pales in size to what happened outside Japan during WW2.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

You don't even get the irony of your own post. Targeting and killing civilians is what criminals do. Curtis LeMay said that he'd have been a war criminal for the deliberate targeting of civilians in the firebombing of Tokyo and Yokohama if the US had lost the war.

It's beyond laughable that you tell someone else to study more about history.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How many nuclear bomb survivors are there around the world where tests were done in say, Nevada, USA, the Pacific Islanders, Kazakhstan, and how many survivors are alive who have experienced making these bombs at nuclear bomb plants in the former USSR or the USA? Interviews with these people are being recorded and can be seen at various sites on the Internet. The experiences of those involved with the processing, storing, transporting, testing, just living near such places are available for the listening and reading. Their voices are also necessary to hear. There was another half century of nuclear bomb activity around the globe after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. That many more casualties and survivors. At least one major nuclear bomb factory has been turned into a wildlife refuge with and infinity room in the center. This borders a luxury home development. The municipal drinking water for several communities came from water stored in resevoirs that received water from the contaminated nuclear bomb plants for decades. "Truth is stranger than fiction" as they say.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Had Japan developed the nuke before the US, Japan would no doubt have used it. The same goes for Germany. Japan and Germany were much more desperate than the US to turn things around amid losing battles. They would've used the nuke to maximize the shock value to Americans. Japan would've dropped the bomb not on some deserted land, but on some city with a lot of military related factories - cities like Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Why did those horrible stories has got to be keep talking until now and every year in August twice the ceremony praying for a no nuclear weapons world.

Why do Chinese, Koreans, Taiwanese, Filipinos, pass down their horrible stories as well?

You can guess which "peaceful "country I am talking about??

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites